Upstate fields 2 choices for court

Monday

Jan 30, 1995 at 12:01 AM

COLUMBIA - Last year, most Upstate lawmakers were united behind Circuit Judge E.C. Burnett III's bid for a vacant seat on the state Supreme Court. Heavy support from the vote-rich Upstate made him a slight favorite going into the opening round of balloting, although he lost his bid on the seventh round. But this year, Burnett, who lives in the Spartanburg County community of Pauline, may not enjoy that advantage as he seeks to fill another vacancy on the state's high court. The reason: Lawmakers, like voters in popular elections, tend to vote for the candidate from their home region over those from neighboring areas, and for those from neighboring areas over those from distant regions. And this year, there's a strong Greenville candidate in the race, Circuit Judge Victor C. Pyle. If past voting patterns are any guide, then most lawmakers from Greenville and Pickens counties are likely to support Pyle, a resident of the 13th Circuit. And lawmakers representing the 7th Judicial Circuit, Spartanburg and Cherokee counties, are likely to stick with Burnett. This regionalism was evident in last year's balloting. On the first ballot, 32 of the 53 votes Burnett received, or 60 percent, came from lawmakers representing six Upstate counties. Eighteen of the 34 votes Circuit Judge Ralph King Anderson of Florence received in that round, or 53 percent, came from Pee Dee lawmakers. Sixteen of 25 votes for Circuit Judge Costa M. Pleicones of Richland County, or 64 percent, came from the Midlands. A divided Upstate vote figures to help Pleicones and Anderson. Upstate lawmakers say it's important to elect a justice from the state's most populous and prosperous region, which hasn't had a representative on the Supreme Court since 1985. "I'd like to think that all of our judges can uphold their duties and tasks in an unbiased manner, and I think most of them do," said Republican Rep. Doug Smith, a Spartanburg lawyer. "But it's important that there be a balance on the appellate bench which fairly represents the makeup of the state . . . "A judge from this area may be attuned to peculiarities about the area, its customs, past and behaviors, which would lend a better understanding and help the court arrive at justice." This year, Pyle and Burnett can make that argument, whereas last year Burnett was the only credible candidate from the region in the seven-way contest. A committee of House and Senate members will meet Wednesday to screen the four candidates running this year. Several weeks later, the committee will issue a report on the candidates' qualifications. Soon after that, the General Assembly will vote. The committee will have the benefit of an anonymous survey, conducted by the South Carolina Bar, about lawyers' views on each of the candidates' legal abilities, judicial temperament and other factors. Candidates are legally barred from asking lawmakers to support them until after the screening committee formally issues its report. Likewise, lawmakers are barred from pledging support until the report comes out. A new wrinkle this year: Committee Chairman Glenn F. McConnell, a Republican senator from Charleston, said the committee will informally release its report to the General Assembly a couple of days before the formal release, so as to prevent candidates from seeking commitments before lawmakers have had a chance to read it. The fact that pledges are forbidden until the screening report comes out doesn't mean a whole lot of subtle interpersonal politicking isn't going on. On almost every day that lawmakers are in town, at least one of the four candidates can be seen cajoling and glad-handing lawmakers in the halls, committee rooms and offices and lobbies in and near the Statehouse. Last May, Burnett was seen as a slight front-runner going into legislative balloting in a fluid race for the seat vacated by the retirement of Chief Justice A. Lee Chandler. On the first ballot, Burnett picked up 53 votes, 20 more than his nearest competitor. Part of that was due to the solid support in the Upstate, another part to the backing of the Legislative Black Caucus. Although he led the voting in the early rounds of balloting, he never achieved the majority he needed to win. In the later rounds, the race gradually slipped away from Burnett as weaker candidates dropped out and their supporters drifted elsewhere, carried by political undercurrents. In the end, the General Assembly surprised even itself by electing Appeals Court Judge Randall Theron Bell, whom many people considered a dark horse, especially in the vote-rich House. Burnett announced immediately he would probably run for Bell's seat on the Appeals Court. But Bell's death from heart failure 10 days after his election stunned and saddened the legal community. One colleague said Bell had possessed the best legal mind in the state and would have made a wonderful Supreme Court justice. After a respectful period, Burnett, Anderson, Pleicones and Pyle announced they would run for Bell's seat this year. The no-pledge rule makes it hard to gauge whether any candidate has an edge. But there are identifiable factors that will almost certainly affect the outcome. The strongest one is regional identification. But there are more subtle factors at play. For example, while Burnett may not have the solid support of the Upstate this year, that problem could be somewhat offset if state Rep. Don Beatty, D-Spartanburg, urges members of the Legislative Black Caucus to support Burnett. If Burnett is elected to the Supreme Court, Beatty would be in a strong position to get elected to replace Burnett on the 7th Circuit bench. The caucus has long had the election of black judges as a top priority. But last year, Beatty didn't push the caucus too much on that point. So in the end, a number of caucus members voted for candidates other than Burnett. "I won't let that happen again this year, if I can help it," Beatty said. "I'm going to make my interests known." The black caucus may wield more influence this year than last, as well. That's because there are 30 members, five more than last year. One reason there are more black members this year is because the caucus, led by Beatty, formed a coalition with Republicans on a bill to redraw House district lines. The result was a bill that spelled certain electoral defeat for a number of white Democrats and the election of more Republicans and black Democrats. There was some speculation that white Democrats who might otherwise have supported Burnett last year did not because they wanted revenge against Beatty. Whether any of that lingering resentment among the remaining white Democrats will play out again this year is an open question.

SCCOUR.T

Never miss a story

Choose the plan that's right for you.
Digital access or digital and print delivery.